Just Jot It January: Day seven…

07 Jan


You’ll be pleased to know that I don’t have time to waffle on too much for today’s Just Jot It January post, so I thought I’d try a little experiment instead.

I’m guessing (hoping) that bloggers are a more reasonable and, frankly, saner bunch than the average Facebook keyboard warrior and I’d be interested to know what people think of something I saw on the political trolls’ favourite virtual playground today.

I don’t usually post memes on the blog, purely because someone else created them and I like to post original content, but I’m going to break that habit today to see what type of feedback I get from my readers, especially those of you in America.

I’ve already reposted it on my Facebook page and I shall post it again here, along with the caption I added, just to see what sort of reaction I get, if any.
Please excuse the strong language, but this sort of thing really gets my goat (however, please feel free to disagree or debate the point with me).

So, brace yourselves, here goes:


Because, ummm….ah yes, terminal fucking stupidity.

There’s this thing called “history” which appears in these other things called “books” and it will inform those who can “read” that practically every word of this meme is complete bollocks.


So, over to you.


Pingback to Linda G Hill.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

40 responses to “Just Jot It January: Day seven…

  1. Mike Bazanele

    January 7, 2016 at 19:57

    Comparing people we don’t like to Hitler is just something we do in America. If you argue about any subject for long enough, it always comes back to Hitler. It’s a lowest-common denominator approach to vilifying things you disagree with.

    • dalecooper57

      January 7, 2016 at 20:18

      Thanks for the visit Mike, good to see you on the blog. I believe that’s called Godwin’s Law isn’t it?

  2. Morgaine620

    January 7, 2016 at 21:04

    Sorry I don’t know enough about US politics neither what the 2. Amendment means to comment. I promise though to inform myself and then come back to discuss the matter.

    It seems though to my ignorant being that comparing Obama to Hitler is pretty farfetched….

    • dalecooper57

      January 7, 2016 at 21:35

      The second amendment to the U.S. constitution is the right to bear arms.
      This meme is suggesting that President Obama’s decision to sensibly regulate gun culture in America is in some way comparable to Hitler and his confiscation of privately owned guns in rural Germany and occupied countries up to and during the second world war.

      So yes, it’s laughable.

      • Morgaine620

        January 7, 2016 at 21:55

        Now that is boll…. Sorry for my robust language but thanks for the explanation. It sure looks like president Obama is planning to start the next world war. I think that’s rather something another president of a huge country is planning ….

      • dalecooper57

        January 7, 2016 at 22:00

        Yes indeed, your analysis, deservedly robust, is correct. Thank you for taking the time to comment.

      • Morgaine620

        January 7, 2016 at 22:03

        🙂 it was a pleasure

  3. Lori Carlson

    January 7, 2016 at 21:40

    This is typical in US politics… I remember George Bush being compared to Hitler many times and well, any time the Right Wings can, they smear Obama in any way they can. This executive order only creates 1 new law: those with clinical (meaning they’ve been hospitalized) mental illness will be placed on a “do not sell” list and quite frankly, as one who is clinically mentally ill (hospitalized 8 times in 7 years and suicidal each time) I wouldn’t want anyone to sell me a gun. All of the other “laws” on this executive order are already on the books… somewhere… and just have not been enforced. So the Right can say Obama is a Hitler for trying to make some sense out of gun safety, but personally, I would rather see this executive action than have this debated in the Republican controlled Congress for all of one day before being tossed out on its arse.

    • dalecooper57

      January 7, 2016 at 21:49

      Thank you Lori for that wonderfully reasoned and candid comment, you hit the nail right on the head. As you may know, my wife is American and has been able to see her country of birth through the incredulous eyes of the British since she and Audrey moved here just over a year ago. Of all the things she misses about the States, (friends, family, lack of rain, that sort of thing) the right-wing nut jobs and the insane gun culture are not high on the list.

      • Lori Carlson

        January 7, 2016 at 21:57

        I can understand why she doesn’t miss them, Dale… it has gotten beyond ridiculous here in the US… for heaven’s sake people are actually considering Donald Trump for president! And there are no serious contenders for opposition to him on the Right and only the saneness of Bernie Sanders on the Left… we are in dire straights here to be sure. Best wishes to you and your family!

      • dalecooper57

        January 7, 2016 at 22:02

        Thank you Lori. Oh, and nice use of the anglicized “arse” in your original comment by the way. ;~}

      • Lori Carlson

        January 7, 2016 at 22:10

        Thanks, Dale… it is my favorite word! I prefer it to the American word 😀

  4. Capt Jill

    January 8, 2016 at 02:54

    it may be a little extreme, but people keep on ignoring the trends. Hopefully, the use of hitler will at least get people to pay some attention to this. We have been losing our freedoms here bit by bit by bit for a long time. I don’t blame it only on obama, bush was terrible with the PATRIOT ACT, NDAA, etc. Obama just continues the trend.
    As far as the 2nd amendment, it says that the government must defend our RIGHT to defend ourselves. This right did not come from the government, it is inherent in the fact that we are all human beings. The US government was created specifically and ONLY to PROTECT those inherent rights. Obviosly, it has grown hugely out of control. As for the 2nd amendment, specifically it says “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. Since it has ALREADY been infringed, by quite a lot of ‘laws’, the people are justifiably upset that obama uses ‘the children’ in order to restrict our rights even more.
    Someone said it already. There are already plenty of laws on the books, they need to spend more effort enforcing those before they make more.
    And by the way, no president can overturn the constitution by executive order!

    • dalecooper57

      January 8, 2016 at 08:35

      “A well regulated militia” is, I believe, also part of that amendment. I don’t think that includes the need for anyone who fancies it to own a machine gun just because they can. And like all laws, it should reflect the times in which we live.
      Just because it used to be necessary or desirable to have an armed population, it doesn’t mean you need to slavishly stick to it. The church used to enforce some ridiculous laws but if we never moved with the times, then we’d still have the Spanish Inquisition, witch trials, people being stoned to death for adultery or put to death for homosexuality and nobody would be allowed to covert their neighbour’s ox.
      There is nothing wrong with regulating the sale of arms to responsible citizens, in the same way that (to borrow another meme) when they regulated and licensed car ownership, they didn’t “take your cars away”.
      You do not need an automatic rifle to defend your home against burglary, nor for hunting and, as for “using the children”, well, if you can’t see how unacceptable it is for a country to have to regularly mourn the preventable deaths of school children, then you’ve become a country blinded by your own mythology.
      As far as the much-used argument that more guns would prevent these tragedies: Not ONE mass shooting has been prevented by an armed civilian in the last fifty years.
      The mark of a civilized and enlightened society is to accept that it needs to adapt to changing times and attitudes and if that means changing an outdated constitution, so be it.

      • Capt Jill

        January 9, 2016 at 04:28

        you’re right, it does mention the militia, but you seem to forget, that militia included ALL able bodied men. Now that we have equal rights (due to legitimate changes in our constitution), I think it also includes women and I do consider myself part of it. I swore an oath to defend the constitution and I do feel like its still worth defending.
        I get your point about the times change. Yes, they do, but principles do not. I think our founding documents were some of the most important in history. For the first time, a government was created to serve the people. For the first time, the government was created ONLY to protect the (recognized by law) inherent (natural) rights that all people possessed. The constitution and specifically the 2nd amendment was written to ensure that we never forget that we have the right and the duty to OVERTHROW our government if (when) it violates those rights!
        The right to self defense never goes out of style, it never goes away no matter what time we may be living in, no matter what government we have. The second amendment was written soon after fighting off the tyranny of Great Britain. Our founding fathers would be called terrorists today. They fought their own government and we can all thank goodness they were ARMED with what it took to win that fight!
        You say we don’t ‘need’ machine guns, well who are you (or anybody else) to decide what I think I need? That is why it is a RIGHT and not a priviledge. We do not need to beg permission to exercise any right, including the right to keep and bear arms.
        And, you happen to be wrong about your idea that no mass shootings have been prevented by armed civilians. There have actually been quite a few incidents where armed citizens HAVE prevented (worse) catastrophes!

      • dalecooper57

        January 9, 2016 at 06:55

        I find the idea that you need to enshrine the right to overthrow your government to be a sad reflection on the inherent distrust and nascent paranoia those first authors of the constitution must have had. Starting a country by telling your elected officials that you reserve the right to violently eject them from power if you feel something they are doing is so terrible, shows a rather sad lack of confidence in yourselves that you could elect a trustworthy government in the first place. It’s a bit like having a pre-nuptial agreement because you’re not really sure if you are going to get on with your spouse and can’t be bothered to properly get to know them first.
        If you’re going to have a revolution, fine, but don’t be go writing yourself a back door into the rules that means you don’t have to fight for it, just elect the right people in the first place.
        And there is no such thing as a “natural right” to anything, simply because all laws and rights were determined by man and therefore subject to all the vagaries and bias of the human condition.
        As for saying that nobody has the right to tell you what you need, well, you’ve just said that your rights were given by the constitution. That’s exactly the same thing, you’re just choosing to pick the rights you want to be told you can have and ignoring the ones that you don’t.
        If the founding fathers had said that NOBODY had the right to bear arms, you’d now be stuck with that if you follow that logic.
        And from what I have found (not just in the article below) most of the reports of “civilians” preventing mass shootings are debatable and at best very rare, compared to the number where everyone (quite sensibly) got the hell out of there.

        Thank you for the discussion, most illuminating.

  5. LindaGHill

    January 8, 2016 at 20:20

    I think the only thing comparable to Hitler in America at the moment is Trump. But that’s just the opinion of a Canadian. 😛

    • dalecooper57

      January 8, 2016 at 20:22

      Who do you think put the “von” in Clownstick?

    • dvaal

      January 9, 2016 at 22:04

      It is shocking -to me! Why would he make such a foolish error? But then, he is Obama!

      • dalecooper57

        January 9, 2016 at 22:22

        What error are you referring to?

      • dvaal

        January 9, 2016 at 23:45

        Replicating Hitler! It seems like he was either to stupid to know Hitler used this move, or was he making a statement, or was he saying “it worked for Hitler, it will work for me?” Makes you ponder his motive.

      • dalecooper57

        January 10, 2016 at 00:23

        I don’t believe he thought anything of the sort.
        Hitler used children purely as window dressing to bolster his public image whilst still trying to deceive people into actually giving up weapons in mass confiscations before invading most of Europe and then indoctrinating millions of other children in the Hitler youth.
        Obama was making a specific point about the tragic and scandalous deaths of school children from gun crime whilst trying to introduce legislation to prevent it happening again.

        I see no comparison whatsoever.

      • dvaal

        January 10, 2016 at 01:44

        I see what you are saying, and I am sure there was that intent. However, I also see a comparison, in the way Obama wants to change America. His ideas, and influence have, at times, made me uncomfortable. I was simply asking questions -that I wondered about. Certainly, not trying to offend. We often make moves, after studying other people. In my mind, what Hitler did was influence others with the use of children -whereas, in my mind, Obama did the same thing. That was my thought.

      • dalecooper57

        January 10, 2016 at 10:06

        I am very hard to offend, don’t worry about that. However, I don’t think it’s at all necessary to compare one thing to another.
        I’m certain dozens of politicians and public figures have used children for their own agendas over the years (I can think of at least two British politicians who have done so, off the top of my head) but Obama is the first one I’ve seen being compared to Hitler.
        Frankly, I think the amount of abuse and disrespect the man gets is unbelievable, especially given that history will almost certainly record him as one of the most successful and popular American presidents ever on the world stage.

        Everyone is if course entitled to their opinion, but so many people blindly follow and regurgitate nonsense that appears in the media these days and it’s depressing that nobody seems capable of forming an opinion of their own anymore. (Present company excluded of course)

      • dvaal

        January 10, 2016 at 14:26

        Well, thank you for excluding me -as I don’t watch much political news. I suppose I should, but I only pay attention when I believe something is going on, I need to open my ears too. My opinions about Obama are unclear to me, at this time. I believe he has done some wonderful things, I also believe he has made some huge mistakes. I am not easily influenced by others -just as you -but just by coming the first American Black President -will get him in the books of History, alone.
        Just as an interest -what makes you believe he is so special? Curiosity peaks!

      • dalecooper57

        January 10, 2016 at 14:48

        I don’t believe Obama to be “special”, exactly, and I don’t claim to be an expert on American politics by any stretch of the imagination, but I have always been an incredulous and fascinated observer of your political system (my wife is American and I have many American friends on Facebook with whom I have discussed these issues at some length) and I’ve followed his presidential career with interest.

        I just feel that the man is considerably more genuine in his concern for social and moral issues than more than one of his recent predecessors and that he has had to fight very hard against some pretty despicable mud-slinging from (mainly) right wing republicans and the News For Idiots style of journalism from the likes of Fox.
        He is of course only human and has all the flaws as the rest of us, but he also depends heavily on the counsel and advice of others whose job it is to inform him (yes, like all of those who came before him) and it’s up to him to choose how to act on that advice. The secret is to know when your own moral compass is pointing you in the right direction even when the advice is to go in another, and then having the strength of character to follow through on that decision.

        I think he’s achieved way more than becoming the first black president and if that was the only thing, or even the main thing he was remembered for, I think that would be a very sad reflection on America.

      • dvaal

        January 10, 2016 at 15:01

        I will agree, that he has the desire to change morality, I mean morality -oh, give me a second and I will get this out. He does have a high concern for moral and social issues -as he sees them.

        I personally love how he manipulates the House. His tactics are both clever and original -to him. He is highly motivated, and determined to make the changes in government he aspires too. I do admire him for this.
        I abhor a President that sits back and lets political manipulation control his presidency.

        As a man -I like him. As a President, he really has scared me at times. Sometimes, his agenda is so forced, I am not sure he is listening to his people, to determine if they want the same things.

        In a world where we are determined to fix everything, we are rushing forward, without taking the time to see the potential consequences. This truly frightens me.

        I, like everyone else, what all people to be treated with dignity, kindness, care, and love. Bt, when we break down our moral compass, we destroy ourselves. If you are in disagreement with me, I’d advise you to study the Roman Empires rule. I see this, happening here. When wrong, is made right -things change for the worst, even when what we wanted was the best. A deliberation of this sort, must be contemplated and thought through for the good of mankind, and for the good of mankind.
        I am thrilled to meet you, and will always be available for debate -as I love to debate. I am also, always willing to hear.

      • dalecooper57

        January 10, 2016 at 15:08

        I would agree that more contemplation of radical change is a good thing but, certainly in the case of your gun laws, change is mortifying slow and late in coming.
        The Romans were pretty much a required subject in history when I was in school so I’ve always been interested in them, especially as there was so much Roman rule here in the UK, so I understand your analogy perfectly.

        It is very good to engage in such an interesting debate and I look forward to hearing your views on other subjects in the future.

      • dvaal

        January 10, 2016 at 15:23

        Wonderful! Anytime you’d like to discuss something, just drop me a line. We are a country, ran by our right to defend ourselves. When you take that right away, you leave the guns in the hands of the law, and bad guys. The good people are not doing the killing -only those mentally ill, and cruel.
        You know the saying, “where there is a will there is a way.” It is a super tough debate, and one I am ill equipped to even decide for myself. Nobody wants to see even one child die. I advocate for children, every day of my life. How do we decide? Follow the path of other countries, or stay true to ourselves? I am not sure -if either of them are working.
        I see violence all over the world. By the way, where are you from? I listen to BBC, so I can be informed everywhere, as I am a firm believer we are a “One” people. If I only listen to American news, I will not have the full story. Our news people are often driven by their own political and personal views. It is hard to trust them. They have changed the face of America -that’s a lot of power to hold.
        Anytime, there is a great power of people their is evil circling.
        So, as I hear these horrible things taking place in other countries -I am worried about us all. It doesn’t seem like anyone is getting it right. So, hard to judge my own country.
        I did hear once that London has a low crime rate, and their police don’t even carry guns. It is an interesting story -but I wonder the validity of it. I would like to see statistics. As I look at England, they seem to have broken down their own moral codes. After all, wasn’t Princess Diana being killed, consider suspicious? And, what about the Prince having an affair, and then marrying her? The other young prince, has been filmed dancing naked. (that one burned me up -how dare people believe they can invade his privacy like that) Even in England, the news determines what the people will know -and will open the doors to privacy.
        Germany, France and England have had major terrorist attacks, that left so many dead -heart breaking. China has been chastised for pollution, and they have areas of their country under cruel rule. What is happening in Africa is appalling -and should be stopped, today! I can go on and on, but I have probably bored you to death by now. My point is -there is no fix. Obama, Gun rights, Government, Country, Terrorist -none of us have the answers -we are just people. For every action, there is a reaction. Some will be good, and others will be devastating. I cry for us all!

      • dalecooper57

        January 10, 2016 at 15:44

        I’m English and you’re right, the vast majority of British police are unarmed. There were 50 deaths by gun violence in the UK last year. In America there were 13,000. That’s roughly 26 times as many deaths from guns, with only about five times the population.

        That is pretty much my argument against a gun culture in one sentence.

      • dvaal

        January 10, 2016 at 15:50

        Thank you for sharing that. I’ve often wondered this very thing. Now, I wonder if Brits are mentally less violent in general. Americans seem to be a rougher sort -the old west mentality. What are your thoughts here? Would gun control have the same effect here -with our mentality? Good question. My niece, at Harvard, should do her dissertation on this.

      • dalecooper57

        January 10, 2016 at 17:32

        I’m not qualified to assess the impact of THAT radical an idea, hahaha. But the logic of vastly fewer guns = fewer dead people isn’t a difficult one to grasp, I don’t think.

      • dvaal

        January 10, 2016 at 17:37

        Surely not -if that will be the answer. I’m inclined to believe it will increase, with the violence being the forefront of our problems. Mass control, fear, and hunger. I just don’t like the idea of the other guy having a gun, and I am left defenseless. You don’t have that fear, because this type of violence is not prominent in your area. If you lived here -you could have a different point of few. I’m not saying your wrong -I’m not saying you’re right -I’m saying I’m not sure -therefore, I’m not ready to get rid of guns, at this point.

      • dalecooper57

        January 10, 2016 at 17:40

        I’m saying that, after two hundred years of getting to the point where you have more guns than people, there is now no way for you to back out, you’re committed to slowly rising self-destruction.
        We’ve never had that culture and therefore do not need to control its effects.

      • dvaal

        January 10, 2016 at 18:12

        Harsh. You have us doomed. We are a people who love our toys. A dangerous toy to be had, but as collectors, we collect what we love. Not for violence, but for the brag. My dad, a sharp shooter for the Air Force, left me several rifles. I cherish them. Not because I want to shoot anyone -quite the contrary -I don’t know if I could harm another, even if my life depended upon it. I cherish them, because they are apart of him. When he was a boy, you owned your own rifle. On the very land I live upon, my dad, and his dad roamed, hunting for food. Just over the hill, my dad lifted his 12 gauge and shot straight up. A squirrel fell down. It wasn’t intentional, but he was out hunting squirrel. It is a memory of him, all wonderful memories of him I cherish. He believed in man’s right to defend himself, and I believed in him. Doesn’t make it right, but it is.

        So, having more guns than people is simply because we love to display, brag, show off, and collect. I think I will have to blog about this, as I believe we are misunderstood here. Not being raised with this thrill -it would make it harder to understand, just as I might find some of your cultures -silly, weird, or wrong. Not, that I’m saying there are, because I haven’t the foggiest of any cultural difference I don’t find intriguing, thus far.
        Matter of fact, I am more one to take a new “learn” and incorporate it into my life, as a means to become “One” with others. Sharing lifestyles is how America first started -we are a nation of nations. I love that about us! Although, when I read about your history, I am fascinated that your lines can be traced back to hundreds of years, with literature, paintings and a long history.

        Sometimes, when reading these historical facts, I am appalled by the violence and cruelty of the times. The beheadings of a queen, in England, to the killing of an entire village of Asians simply because they would prevent someone from being in power, the ripping apart of people from limb to limb, by Indians, Asians, French?, so many cultures, The Germans wiping out nearly an entire people, the other countries, (france, Austria, Poland, Russia) betraying the jews, to save themselves from Hitler, we could go on and on -but as you know, the list would be too long. Throughout history, people have been fascinating as they clawed their way to the world we are today, and we are still clawing -each of us, in some way. Maybe, the truth is, we are all doomed. In a way, we are still barbaric -with finesse.

      • dalecooper57

        January 10, 2016 at 18:30

        I’m sure you are a perfectly reasonable and responsible gun owner, as are the majority of Americans. But a small percentage of them aren’t. And a small percentage of such a large population is still a lot of people. I’m afraid, national pride, constitutional issues and responsible citizens aside, it’s just impossible to argue against the fact that more guns equal more death, you just can’t, the statistics speak for themselves whichever way you spin them.

        I accept you will never change the fact that you are always going to be an armed country, but I will never be convinced that it’s a good idea.

      • dvaal

        January 10, 2016 at 18:43

        I, as well, will never be convinced it is a good idea. We absolutely agree there. Guns do kill. Not having guns, when others get them illegally, also kills. Not having guns when others come to terrorize you country, your home, also kills. There is no right answer, or wrong answer. I believe we both carry truth in our words. If we could only shake a magic wand, take away all the guns, see how life goes -ah, that would be great.
        But, then if it didn’t work out, we’d have to fight congress, fight the vote, fight against those that used swords, knives, clubs, cars, bats, pitch-forks -again, I could keep going on. A magic wand -would it fix everything? Or, just fighting over the wand!

        I so appreciate your opinions, and I value them, for their insight, and promise of a better tomorrow. I hope we can find it.

    • dvaal

      January 9, 2016 at 22:05

      That could be food for thought -as a voter in America.

      • dalecooper57

        January 9, 2016 at 22:21

        If Trump wins, the whole world is in trouble.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Running with the Pack

An American Gypsy

Chet Desmond Has Vanished

But Where Did He Go?

48 before its too late

48 states in an RV in 6 months.


French magazine - art & visual culture


The online presence of dark fiction writer C.M. Saunders


"We write to taste life twice, in the moment and in retrospect"

Little Fears

Tales of humour, whimsy and courgettes


The ramblings of a very troublesome haemorrhoid on health, travel, art, sport, bad dogs, good cats and other stuff at

The Lessons

that time forgot to teach


The Best of British Bullshit

Homeschool To UnSchool

Teaching Our Kids to Wonder Again


words and scribble.


hedy bach original photography mixed stories and music

Isabella Morgan

Opinions not otherwise specified

Author Kyle Perkins

The latest and greatest of my documented daydreams

Rereading Jane Eyre

Author Luccia Gray

Luca Sartoni

Protector of Asynchronicity at Automattic

Pages That Rustle

The journey from words to stories.


For your mind only!

Waruni Anuruddhika

Film and photography

An Artist’s Path

Art, Poetry, Spirituality & Whimsy

Tyler Charles Austen

Foul mouthed, Queer and Angry


The facepainting and balloon twisting lady

Art by Rob Goldstein

There is no common truth, but there are facts.

Kristin King Author

True Story...


- a creative lifestyle blog -


To Share, To Connect, To Create, To Inspire.

unbolt me

the literary asylum


Music means something

Broken Castles

Shattered long ago...

Joshi Daniel Photography

Images of People Photoblog


Every day I'm jugglin'.

The Write Project

"The answer is to write." - Richard Rhodes

b e t u n a d a

I'm interested in THE GLUE BETWEEN THINGS. "Back on planet URTH" i search for and study desert wombats and inukThingies (they're like inukshuks) while rambling in the high desert of western Colorawdough.

Sam Seabornen

Photography, Movies, Books

%d bloggers like this: